[syslinux] core_udp_sendto: no mapping

[Gene Cumm]

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 2:38 PM, Joakim Tjernlund
<Joakim.Tjernlund at infinera.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-11-27 at 18:18 -0500, Gene Cumm wrote:

>> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 6:07 PM, Joakim Tjernlund
>> <Joakim.Tjernlund at infinera.com> wrote:
>> > On Mon, 2017-11-27 at 18:03 -0500, Gene Cumm wrote:
>> > > On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Gene Cumm <gene.cumm at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > > On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Joakim Tjernlund
>> > > > <Joakim.Tjernlund at infinera.com> wrote:
>> > > > > On Mon, 2017-11-27 at 08:42 -0500, Gene Cumm wrote:
>> > > > > > Bringing the discussion to the list.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > You stated you see the following on your Lenovo ThinkPad T470s with
>> > > > > > UEFI firmware N1WET41W (1.20 date: 10/17/2017):
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >   core_udp_sendto: stalling on configure with no mapping
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > OUI 54-E1-AD
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > lspci -s 0:1f.6 -v
>> > > > > > 00:1f.6 Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation Ethernet Connection (4)
>> > > > > > I219-V (rev 21)
>> > > > > >         Subsystem: Lenovo Ethernet Connection (4) I219-V
>> > > > > >         Flags: bus master, fast devsel, latency 0, IRQ 125
>> > > > > >         Memory at dc200000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=128K]
>> > > > > >         Capabilities: [c8] Power Management version 3
>> > > > > >         Capabilities: [d0] MSI: Enable+ Count=1/1 Maskable- 64bit+
>> > > > > >         Capabilities: [e0] PCI Advanced Features
>> > > > > >         Kernel driver in use: e1000e
>> > > > > >         Kernel modules: e1000e
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > This might be the only wired NIC but there's possibly multiple device
>> > > > > > handles to it and possibly a device handle to the wrong NIC
>> > > > > > (wireless).
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > In your EFI shell (hopefully you have such an option):
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > version > fs0:\efi-ver.txt
>> > > > > > dh -p Net > fs0:\efi-dh-net.txt
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Feel free to run it without the redirect (">") to see the results
>> > > > > > yourself.  The redirects would help if you can access the files so you
>> > > > > > don't need to manually transcribe the output.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Here's some other UEFI Shell commands that may be of use:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > guid > fs0:\efi-guid.txt
>> > > > > >   or     alias > fs0:\efi-alias.txt
>> > > > > > dh > fs0:\efi-dh.txt
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Managed to install an EFI shell from here:
>> > > > >  https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/blob/master/ShellBinPkg/UefiShell/X64/Shell.efi
>> > > > >
>> > > > > and got a dh > dh.txt
>> > > > > I don't know what to do with this info so attaching it here.
>> > > >
>> > > > Ok.  Different GUID aliases.  Line 1381 says what I see as "Net" you
>> > > > likely see as "SimpleNetwork".  This handle has the necessary
>> > > > "UDPv4ServiceBinding" (I see as "UDPv4Sb").
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks for the excellent data.  It's been a while since I looked at
>> > > > the handle search code to debug this.
>> > >
>> > > Did you ever see a "disable UseDefaultAddress" message?  The code
>> > > should have printed those original messages dump the new message then
>> > > try again at doing the network transaction.
>> >
>> > Yes, that was the last message I think. Then, after a while, it rebooted.
>> > I figured the names(Net vs. SimpleNetwork) to search for was standardized?
>>
>> That's a partially good thing.  This says it tried to bind UDP where
>> we got PXE, failed, hunted for something that provides UDP on the same
>> MAC, found it, attempted to use the UseDefaultAddress flag, failed to
>> configure, and fell back to attempting to manually configure the
>> entire UDP datagram.  At this point, it should have just worked.
>>
>> The aliases/names aren't entirely standardized and it's just a
>> friendly name for the GUID (which is standardized).  The aliases could
>> easily be localized though I believe there's only 2 common groups, the
>> two we see here.
>>
>> Did you happen to peek at the version command?  I'm guessing it's
>> saying 2.0 since the UDPv4Sb is not on the same handle as the PxeBc.
>
> Gene, I am curious, do you have an idea how to fix this?

Yes, I have an idea but I need to add some debug code so I can
understand more how your particular machine is behaving.

-- 
-Gene